Assignment 2 - Case Study

NEED:

Since Russian Invasion the city town planners establishes a clear division between the local Uzbek people's territory and the new developed part specifically organised for newly arrived Russian population. Out of superiority quest for power Russian dominant forces not only as a more educated, industrialised, progressive nation developed and built a new part of the city with its radial street system and other Renaissance features of the city plan.  

Wea re interested here in what happened in the twentieth century and related to the history of the hotel "Uzbekistan". Linked to the reconstruction of the city after the earthquake in April  1966, the city's town- planning and architecture in the 70's was gives special priority, to provide new housing for people. In the 1970 a new, edited town plan was approved and ready to be xxxxxx, taking into consideration to not only provide material but also spiritual support for everyone. Architecture in Uzbekistan has taken a new turn - Compromising Modernism.

CONTEXT:

The Hotel is located in the center of Tashkent, near Amir Timur Square. One of the most attractive and prestigious buildings in Tashkent, situated in the business centre of the city, close to subway station. It is a strategic location, because it was built right in the heart of the new city, close to all the  banks, parks, museums, shopping centres, etc. Image 1

To look at its location from the town-planning point of view, the hotel marks the beginning of the new city, it stands with its back to the buffer created from the 'neutral' buildings, social services and organizations that need to be accessed by people from both sides. Image 2

As we can see there is a clear distinction between the old city, local people and the new city - Russian imposed circular street structure and the new architectural  'style' - Modernism. 

Social, Economic and Political Systems:
the imposition of Communist structure of the society onto indigenous native Uzbek people as well as establishing dominant Russian culture, and Modernist architecture and “new” ways of living. Uzbek people were other within this new established rule. They had to find the way to adapt to the new regime and still maintain their traditional and cultural objectives. 

The hotel is a mix of the Modernist and Uzbek architectural styles. (Compromising Modernism). Uzbek Architects were working from within the system to alter it to their own purposes, not rejecting the dominant rule but by using these rules with respect to the dominant force, but deflecting its power. We see application of panjaras (shades) in shaped as  geometric patterns on the surfaces of Modernist buildings. These decorative as well as practical elements were the means of appropriating architecture, making it more familiar to native Uzbek people. These patterns did not challenge Modernism, although very upfront and obvious they had a hidden meaning, which could only be understood only by people in the culture.

FORM:

The structural and stylistic force that influenced the form of the hotel and architecture of the time is Modernism, which has some very distinct features like simplicity and geometry. There are plain monochrome surfaces, straight lines, that are evident in Modernist constructions.

The Austrian architect Adolf Loos banned ornament from architecture in 1908 with these preposterous, unsupported statements:

The evolution of culture is synonymous with the removal of ornament from utilitarian objects. ... not only is ornament produced by criminals but also a crime is committed through the fact that ornament inflicts serious injury on people's health, on the national budget and hence on cultural evolution. ... Freedom from ornament is a sign of spiritual strength.

(Adolf Loos, "Ornament and Crime", in Urlich Conrads, Ed., Programs and Manifestoes on 20th-Century Architecture (Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1971) pp. 19-24.)

Modernism not only opposes ornament, at large it is an affront to many religions, by denying their architectural expression. It arrogantly opposes the basic principle of connecting an individual to the universe -- hence to God -- through color, design, sculpture, and calligraphy.

Modernism forbids sensory connections. With its insistence on flat plain surfaces showing minimal information, it questions the continued validity of architecture that are also powerful symbols of faith.

In Le Corbusier's words: "Decoration is of a sensorial and elementary order, as is color, and is suited to simple races, peasants and savages" (page 143). (Le Corbusier, Towards a New Architecture (London: Architectural Press, 1927). [Vers Une Architecture, Paris: Editions Crès, 1923].)

He appears not to know that the buildings on the Athenian Acropolis, which he professed to admire so much, were originally painted with bright contrasting colors.

Looking around at twentieth century buildings, one is hard-pressed to discover visual patterns. Indeed,  architects go to great lengths to disguise patterns on human scales that are inevitable because of the activities in a building.

Modernism also forbids the word of God (and God's name) from being used in an architectural setting. Classical Islamic calligraphy constitutes a major art form that has always played a central role in architecture. Arabic script lends itself even more than Latin or Greek letters to visual connectivity using internal scaling. The informational meaning of ornamental Islamic calligraphy and ornament on architectural surfaces escapes most non-Muslims. People who understand the language and respect its content connect instantly with a building through the message of the text, which establishes a deeply emotional link to an individual. Those who cannot read the script can only imagine the powerful meaning it endows on a built structure. All of us can observe the incredible degree to which the calligraphy and ornament  achieves meaning just in design terms. (Referring back to the Compromising Modernism discussed earlier)

Modernism  insists that "honest" architecture should not hide its structure: architectural "honesty", however, is not defined, nor are any reasons given for why the idea has any value. Traditional cultures have a far stronger religious sense than the industrialized western nations do today.

Plan: (Fig. 1)

It is useful to distinguish between abstract patterns on a plan, and perceivable patterns on building façades, walls, and pavements. 

A plan is an abstract pattern for the architect and the builder to visualise and construct the building. When developing a plan there are several issues like symmetry, lines, proportions, economy of space and other.

Notice from the plan that although this hotel  was built in all modernist traditions, Uzbek people relate to the shape of the building as an Open Book. The structure and the shape definitely could be associated with the Koran book, open in the middle. 

We can talk about the plan of the building and its abstract patterns, this discussion can go deep into investigation of shape grammar, interactive matrices, dual graphs. For an average person, who would experience the hotel when it is ready built would be quite difficult to reconstruct the plan of the building because in a normal walled building, the pattern of its plan is largely hidden from view by the built structure and symmetries on a building's plan are not always observable. Therefore I would argue that for an average person the visual patterns have the strongest emotional and cognitive impact because they are immediately accessible.

Historically, architecture was part of mathematics, and in many periods of the past, the two disciplines were indistinguishable. In the ancient Greek and Roman worlds, mathematicians were architects, whose constructions are - the pyramids, temples, irrigation projects etc. This tradition continued into the Islamic civilisation. Islamic architects created a wealth of two-dimensional tiling patterns and ornaments. Patterns used on the building are constructed out of the basic initial element, and by repetition create an interesting decorative motive, where there is no longer possible to differentiate the positive space from negative. See here. Patterns are  mathematical and  logical. I believe that it was exactly this knowledge and its mathematical proof which demonstrated no threat to the structural architectural form and was allowed to be applied onto the facade of the building. However, by doing that they not only admitted to the height of the Intellectual thought of Islamic culture but also gave away the emotional  rights to the building.